The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Tech Cam advice please !!

satybhat

Member
Could someone advise me on their experiences as to why they chose their particular technical camera and how they have fared ? Or a link to any previous such discussion on this forum ?
My confusion here likely arises from two factors:

1. the high costs involved - no respite from this
2. equal fervour from different people about different systems.
eg: Dan Lindberg swears by the Alpa (citing precision / tolerance, etc) Rod Klukas, the Arca, citing similar reasons, David Ward talks about the Linhof Technikardan, someone else about cambos...
thus, totally confusing me over the issue.

The Alpa FPS has received some raging reviews and Mal here has been very helpful laying out the possibilities in front of me.

I understand that various players can only cite their experiences with the systems they own, but when you have a few systems, obviously one has to be better than the other.
What I would be looking at: (most likely buying a IQ260 back soon ).
a) Ability to stitch (not sure if I should consider pano head ) instead of shift – any pros and cons regarding why you would prefer one over the other
b) Ability to tilt and swing, though not necessarily at the same time.
c) Some reassurance with inclement weather use. I understand that the back tolerate a good deal of cold. But what about drizzles ? how do the chaps out here tackle water ?

If money was no issue, would any of you gentlemen consider switching from one system to the other ?

So please.... for landscapes and panoramas:
which technical camera and why ?
Which pano head and why ?
Apologies for the long-winded train of thought…

Thanks,
Saty
 

satybhat

Member
BTW Doug and Ken, I forgot to thank you for your input on one another forum. Please feel welcome to chime in again ! much appreciated.
 

tjv

Active member
Review: Linhof Techno

Here's a link to a review of the Linhof Techno written by fellow forum member, Anders Torger. It pretty much mirrors my thinking about using this camera, but in short:
This is a great system IF you like or, like me prefer, ground glass focusing. If not, then Alpa / Cambo / Arca are better for you, although at the expense and gain of some features. I wouldn't trade this camera for the world, although I love to hang out under a dark cloth!
TJV
 

danlindberg

Well-known member
A very brief answer.

I think you will find that most tech cam users are happy with whatever system they chose from the beginning.
I believe there are clever people behind every system - different ways of doing the same things, but nevertheless clever solutions. All the tech makers/systems are of high build quality.
So, for me, I would look at which 'concept' appeals to me the most as a whole and which of the brands is most likely to evolve and come up with new exciting products along the way.
It is true that I am still in love with the Alpa concept after many years of use, but the same goes for a long time Arca user.

As they say - 'same-same, but different'!
 

torger

Active member
It depends on your photographic style.

If you're a lot into grand scenes I'd say Alpa or Arca-Swiss, or Cambo. If you often do more intimate compositions I think a Linhof Techno is better suited, as you then more often use longer lenses and more tilt/swings. The Techno can also be more economical if you use many lenses.

David Ward still shoots film, but I think his images is a very good example of a photographic style that fits a view camera like a glove: Into The Light | Gallery

I'd say Alpa satisfies the broadest amount of users based on what I've seen and heard. I like Arca as it has tilt built into the body, but I'd prefer to have Alpa's focusing ring (Arca's seems a bit too precise, ie slower to work with). I have a Linhof Techno now and is pleased with it, but if economy was a non-issue and I'd mostly just shoot wides of grand scenes using a 80 megapixel back and rodenstock lenses I'd have an Alpa or Arca as these are more fool-proof. The Techno can have some parallelism issues if you don't watch out. Note that if you read my Techno review that I'm an extremely picky user, I'd find issues with Alpa's and Arca's too if I got around reviewing those. I believe a review should point out both the strong and weak points.

Actually, if economy was a non-issue I'd probably have both an Arca and a Techno, for my style I would be using the Techno the most.

The FPS is gaining popularity, and I'm having a bit of angst from that as I think it's kind of the beginning of the death of tech cameras: less and less movements, more and more similar to mainstream mirrorless cameras. I know many won't agree with me and it would be nice to have one if economy was a non-issue, but it would not be my only tech camera. I think tech cameras should do more to the style than just high resolution images. Of the mentioned examples I'd say that the Techno is the techiest concerning shooting style (well, most similar to traditional large format), but also the hardest to use (mainly due to that you need to rely on the ground glass).
 
Last edited:

kdphotography

Well-known member
The big three are Alpa, Arca, and Cambo. Each have several different models with different abilities/nuances and appeal. To discern quality at this level of photographic equipment is really nit-picking; the vast majority of the public (and even "photographers") will have no clue if you decide to discuss the attributes of an Alpa/Arca/Cambo over a typical DSLR.

The reality is that the selection of a technical camera is a subjectively personal one, finding the system that works for you, while appealing to the emotional draw as well. Hence, if you ask which technical camera is "best," there is no right answer except for the one you choose. So wade into Dante's Inferno carefully, and enjoy the tour.

If you can join up with a workshop/seminar or visit with those with technical cameras---and use the different bodies, that would be the ideal introduction into finding the right Alpa/Arca/Cambo for you, as well as which range of lenses suit you best. And, you'll also be able to see all the variations/accessories of how others have decided to modify their platforms for use in the field.

I think all will handle a moderate amount of abuse without blinking, and a bit of common sense goes a long way. At the point of abuse and weather extremes, imho, photography just isn't any fun anymore. Go to the second photo down (and click to enlarge) in this blog article, and you can see how my Cambo and IQ180 handle a bit of moisture: Photographing Oregon with the Cambo WRS1050 and Phase IQ180 | Kendoophotography's Blog

Your selection of an IQ260 is the best imho for a technical camera, providing you with basically the best of all worlds----a great all around back. Add the Arca Swiss Cube to any technical camera system and you're set.

Ken

p.s. If you're in the area, Capture Integration in Carmel is coming back in February 2014, and is a great opportunity to try out new medium format digital gear and technical cameras. As always, bring your credit card; you might not need it for buying gear, but bail money is always a concern. :D

p.p.s. My technical camera is a Cambo WRS, IQ180, with Rodenstocks. Arca Cube on RRS tripod.
 

Nutcracker

New member
I went with Alpa FPS as my first foray into tech cameras, having Nikon and PhaseOne systems already: no regrets, really enjoying it. Nikon PCE lenses work well, 24mm good but restricted image circle, 85mm very good full coverage of IQ180 also with a little tilt or shift possible, and HR 32 FPS amazingly good. Might not provide for your needs in full, but a truly remarkable device. Next stop for me probably Alpa STC and tilt adaptor.
 

Geoff

Well-known member
There are some basic differences between the systems which separate the cameras - at least on a first blush. Many of these differences can be overcome, or become less important, so while they might suggest categorization, they are not absolutes, but here's a try. This is not meant to be a comprehensive listing, but is intended as a simple introduction. In general, most "summaries" are flawed, and of limited use - so take these impressions with a large pile of salt.

So here goes:

The first major difference is between "pancake" and tech'l cameras - the pancake cameras (Alpa, Arca, Cambo, Sinar) have the lens mount is "flat" to the film plane or digital sensor, and that the lens is moved from that plane by some built in arrangement (typ. helical mount). In pancakes with movements, there are two alum plates, one that holds the back, the other the lens mount, and their movement is highly controlled (typ. by gearing). In tech'l cameras (of which the Techno is the only one here noted), the arrangement is more like a view camera of old, where there is a front panel holding a fixed lens, and a back panel, and a bellows in-between. Movements are by adjustments of the panels, and the bellows takes the slack.

The pancake cameras are more popular, and have advantages in setup and parallelism of the plates. However, extensive movements with them are more restricted, although typically most don't mind.

By camera (only for four, tho others are similar):

Alpa - pancake camera, modular system, high level of machining accuracy, some restraints on flexibility, SWA and STC handholdable but movements only in one direction. Their "Max" model has movements in both directions. Tilt via add-on mounts. Focusing via helical, set your distance.

Arca Swiss - RM3Di is pancake, but geared movements in both directions, built in tilt, highly accurate focusing helical lens mount (5 turns), integrated with snappy DOF "calculator" for each lens. Very precise for closer work as well. Lens mounts can be used on their view camera models.

Cambo - also pancake, geared movements in both directions, helical mounts for focusing, less compact than Alpa, but more handholdable than Arca. Less expensive

Techno - view camera setup (bellows), with full movements on front panel, rise only on back. Built in broad range of movements, uses traditional lens boards (unlike the others, who mount the lenses in proprietary focusing mounts).

Shifting adapters (sliding) can be used on all but the Alpa, provide flexibility, but are slower in operation. They offer the ability to stitch quickly,and can expand the image size (and use of a lens) widely. For some of the pancakes, shifting can be done directly on camera.

Focus is available on all via ground glass, but often this means taking the digital back on and off. So another approach is often used - for example, distance can be measured and focus set on the Alpa (precisely with HPF rings) and also on the Cambo. On the Arca, it can be set by number on the focus ring (extremely precise). On the Techno, its by hyper focal or ground glass, often with stitching back. Live view allows focusing through the digital back, which can change some of this.

Usability - the Alpa and Cambo are best for handholding with smaller size and good handles, the Arca less so although some do it. On the tripod, the Arca is a quick to set up; the Techno has the most initial flexibility. Keep an eye out for weight - as the cameras are "built up", it can increase.

Each camera system can be adjusted to compensate for different uses in their own (and often proprietary) way - the range of accessories for the Alpa are extensive and can (budget permitting) allow a wide range of uses. Cambo also has a wide range of accessories. Workarounds can be found - for example, focusing by hyper focal on the Techno can be done for landscapes . Viewfinders are rather a complicated matter, and vary. Some use iPhones or third party setups, or not at all.

Apologies for exclusions or errors. Your own investigation will reveal the important differences to you, which are difficult to identify up front.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I'd also mention you should look into repair/service/support times/ease/cost for each system as well as thoroughly examine the long-term cost of the system (not just the very basic system you need to start). There are large differences in these areas that can make a big difference on your long term satisfaction and enjoyment of the system.

Arca does their repairs through Precision Camera in the US, and you can google "Arca Swiss repair" or "Precision Camera experience" to find people vouching for their fast turn around times in the US. Similarly Cambo has always accommodated us on warranty repairs and being flexible on the interpretation of what should fall in warranty and what shouldn't. I can't speak for other countries or brands, but it's worth your research.

A technical overview of the systems most popular in the US market is here:
Tech Camera Overview
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Arca Swiss - RM3Di is pancake, but geared movements in both directions, built in tilt, highly accurate focusing helical lens mount (5 turns), integrated with snappy DOF "calculator" for each lens. Very precise for closer work as well. Lens mounts can be used on their view camera models.
Also the Arca R body itself can be used as the front standard for their full sized view cameras, allowing those view cameras to gain the ultra-precise focusing system it provides.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I also agree with the overall sentiment that all of the companies mentioned make fine, precise, wonderful tech camera systems. It's a matter of finding one that fits your style, fits your budget, and will make you a happy long-term owner.

NOTHING will substitute for actually handling these systems and shooting with them. If you're ever in NYC or want to make a trip of it we can go out and shoot with an Arca and Cambo with you and down the street you can see Alpa all in the same trip.
 

stephengilbert

Active member
As Doug often points out, he works for a company that sells Arca products.

Without suggesting that one or another of the cameras is better than the others, I wonder how often repairs are necessary. I do know that when you want information from ALPA, you can get it on their website or by contacting ALPA directly.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
As Doug often points out, he works for a company that sells Arca products.

Without suggesting that one or another of the cameras is better than the others, I wonder how often repairs are necessary. I do know that when you want information from ALPA, you can get it on their website or by contacting ALPA directly.
Or you can just contact Graham or Steve here at GetDPI...

:ROTFL:
 

f8orbust

Active member
With a tech cam, your money is in the glass and the lens mount. So, if you're dipping your toe in the water I would look at the Techno or A/S ML2 - they'll give you the whole tech cam experience (fall/rise/shift/swing/tilt) without the need for expensive helicals, until you're sure this style of shooting is for you. They're far more flexible than any of the rigid pancake style cameras as well, so you can use them for multiple purposes without the need for add-ons (spacers, extension tubes etc.).

If you then decide to go some place else - Alpa/Arca/Cambo/Silvestri etc. - it's fairly easy to get your lenses retrofitted.

Jim
 

jlm

Workshop Member
taking a a shot with one of these babies has it's issues, unique to the digital back scenario;

1. composing: wysiNOTwyg; what you get is what you get. most will rough frame, take a shot and adjust. ground glass composing is possible, but has it's own limitations. an I-phone can be useful (i use viewfinder pro app) to see the same field of view of my lenses (and back). i typically hand hold it.

2. focus: similar story to above. since the backs can resolve so well, one typically wants the focus to be exactly where you want it. GG is best for pre-shot, preview shot is quite useful (IQ backs best for this) and ultimately correct. getting the helicoid to put the lens where you want it is fussy: the Arca has a distance look up table and a very fine pitched helicoid; alpa has a normal pitch helicoid and offers a more finely divided distance scale on the lens, Cambo similar, but the stock distance scale. and the you have to know your subject distance; i use a laser rangefinder (Leica or Leupold) they are great.

3. tilt/swing and focus: here the distance scales are less useful, preview shot works best: tilt, shoot, inspect, adjust, re-shoot, etc. Cambo will allow two axes of rotation at once, most of the others just one (body can be rotated to change from tilt to swing, for example). the IQ focus mask is great for examining a preview shot for focus

4. shift: mostly a function of the image circle of the lens; arca, alp and cambo use geared motion, horseman does not. not all will allow shift in both directions at the same time.

5. misc. you will have an electrical cable between the shutter and the back and usually a dangling shutter release cable. with the back in zero latency mode, click the shutter, the back takes the image, but battery drain is greater. otherwise two clicks: one to wake the back, re-cock, re-shoot.
6. you will need a big camera bag; lots of expensive fairly fragile gear to access and protect

7 get a beefy tripod
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Not mentioned here but I saw at the last workshop in Arcadia the Sinar AirTec camera, Yea not a cheap tech cam by any means but about the most functional tech cam yet and it was just sexy as hell to boot. If I had a lot of money this would be one to look at as well. I owned the cambo AE model and loved it but you do get 4 choice brands to look at all there models. The Sinar AirTec has the most functionality.
 
Top